US has no better option than deal with Iran
Jalal Dehghani Firouzabadi
The US had shifted its approach to Iran in recent weeks, moving away from military action and toward economic pressure. But the president has once again ordered strikes on areas in southern Iran, prompting a response from Tehran. The latest moves suggest that Washington is determined to pursue its objectives by whatever means necessary and at any cost.
International relations analyst Jalal Dehghani Firouzabadi, however, told IRNA that it was unlikely that a combination of war and maximum pressure would force Iran to submit to Washington’s demands. If Tehran ultimately concludes that it should reach a deal, he said, Washington would eventually have no better option either.
Tehran has described the Islamabad memorandum of understanding as the most important document underpinning its engagement with the US. What factors have turned this understanding into Tehran’s most important precondition for any further interaction with Washington? Should this insistence be seen as a sign of strategic flexibility or as an indication that Tehran’s options are narrowing?
DEHGHANI: There were two views in Iran on the MoU. One took a positive view of the understanding and regarded it as serving the national interest, while the other stood in opposition to it.
Recently, however, a view has once again begun to take shape — if not a consensus — that the US should return to the MoU. In a way, this can be described as “strategic flexibility” or a return to the previous strategy. Rather than allowing the understanding to be violated, the emphasis is on implementing it through coercive diplomacy and a combination of negotiations and defense.
Some evidence and media reports suggest that the US is not interested in returning to this MoU. Is that assessment consistent with the realities on the ground, or is Washington in some way trying to play up the issue?
The US does not have many options. It either has to escalate tensions and launch an all-out war to achieve its objectives, or hold on to the status quo — neither war nor peace, along with the continued closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the blockade. The third option is a deal.
Page 3